ApolloHoax.net
Apollo Discussions => The Hoax Theory => Topic started by: onebigmonkey on January 16, 2013, 02:54:13 PM
-
It seemed rude to just wade into posts without saying hi first, so..erm..hi!
I posted on the old board as Threadworm, and introduced my examination of Apollo era satellite imagery and comparisons with Apollo images.
Since then I spent a long time refining and adding material to that work, and converting it into a website. Some of you may have seen me post details of this site at JREF and elsewhere on the interwebs, but for those who haven't seen it, the Apollo part of the site is here:
onebigmonkey.comoj.com/obm/apollo.html (http://onebigmonkey.comoj.com/obm/apollo.html)
In addition to the satellite image stuff, there is a collection of google earth kmz files that plots the position of every Apollo Hasselblad image taken from lunar orbit, some youtube videos compiled from sequences of still images, a hastily concocted analysis of images of the lunar disk taken in cislunar space, and some pictures of Charlie Duke from a talk l attended.
I intend to add, at some point, an examination of features visible on Apollo surface photographs and LRO images but not on Lunar Orbiter photographs, and scans of articles from Life magazine articles that I have been acquiring. And whatever else I may think of.
If anyone has any requests for things from the Life magazines let me know.
I hope people find them useful and/or interesting, and you are welcome to use them in any discussions you may have. I am almost done arguing with the deluded - I have spent far too much of my life poring over photographs defending that which needs no defending, and raised my blood pressure more than my doctor would be happy with. I find it far more rewarding to provide something useful! I am of course available for bar mitzvahs, weddings and all expenses paid NASA funded trips to conferences to talk about it.
That said, I will join in where I think I can add something :)
(Edited by LunarOrbit to make the URL for onebigmonkey's website a clickable link)
-
You've been busy, it seems. Welcome back to the game.
-
Thanks for finding us again. I'm a big fan of your work.
-
A really impressive website, just goes to show how hard it is for someone who really looks at the Apollo record to find any of those anomalies that the HBs want to be there.
My, those Apollo fakers were thorough.
-
Onebigmonkey? Now there's a user name straight out of the Agatean Empire ;D
-
Onebigmonkey? Now there's a user name straight out of the Agatean Empire ;D
Well, I'm 6'6" and have a fair amount of ape DNA, it kind of fits :D
And thank you for the compliments above. I'm sure there are mistakes in what I've done - no matter how many times I go through it they seem to slip through, but whatever I've got wrong in the text, the images speak for themselves.
-
Onebigmonkey? Now there's a user name straight out of the Agatean Empire ;D
Well, I'm 6'6" and have a fair amount of ape DNA, it kind of fits :D
Welcome, it is always good to have new Hominids on the forum :)
On a side note, I think we've found Bigfoot!!
-
Thanks for finding us again. I'm a big fan of your work.
+1
-
I stumbled across your website last week and was duly impressed. The strongest counter argument I read from an HB was that "it is just like the Apollo geeks to go into so much detail" but that was when your work first came on line a few years back.
-
"it is just like the Apollo geeks to go into so much detail"
We may do it in response to them, but not because of them.
-
I stumbled across your website last week and was duly impressed. The strongest counter argument I read from an HB was that "it is just like the Apollo geeks to go into so much detail" but that was when your work first came on line a few years back.
Oh the irony of that criticism, from the kind of people that will find a fraction of a degree difference in the direction of a shadow and make a 15 minute youtube video out of it .
One of the points I try to make is that it doesn't matter how small a detail you focus on, even details that are entirely unconnected and that no-one has considered before, it still hangs together, and the reason for that is because we went and that it is all true.
One reason why I felt I had to go into so much detail was to make sure that nits couldn't be picked. I hope the only response conspiracy drones have is "yeah well they would say that".
The one thing I am waiting for is Soviet data, which I know are out there somewhere. That really would be the clincher, except for the real extremists who claim they were all in it together!
-
Some really interesting reading. Thanks so much for going over this as it really needed to be said.
-
I've added a new section to my site called 'Landing Sights' (see what I did there?).
A landing denier informed me that the Apollo sets were constructed using details from the Lunar Orbiter probes. My mission is to prove that the Lunar Orbiter data were good, but not that good, and the the surface details shown in Apollo images match LRO views for a good reason: they were taken on the Moon.
It's work in progress, but Apollo 11 & 12 are up there. Hope it all makes sense - it's easy to get lost in this stuff!
http://onebigmonkey.comoj.com/obm/landingsights.html (http://onebigmonkey.comoj.com/obm/landingsights.html)